[Federal Register: March 16, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 52)]
[Notices]
[Page 14355-14377]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr16mr00-134]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
[CFDA Nos.: 84.133N and 84.133E]
Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, National
Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, Notice Inviting
Applications for New Model Spinal Cord Injury Centers and New
Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers for Fiscal Year 2000
Note to Applicants: This notice is a complete application package.
Together with the statute authorizing the programs and applicable
regulations governing the programs, including the Education Department
General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR), this notice contains
information, application forms, and instructions needed to apply for a
grant under these competitions.
These programs support the National Education Goal that calls for
all Americans to possess the knowledge and skills necessary to compete
in a global economy and exercise the rights and responsibilities of
citizenship.
The estimated funding levels in this notice do not bind the
Department of Education to make awards in any of these categories, or
to any specific number of awards or funding levels, unless otherwise
specified in statute.
Applicable Regulations: The Education Department General
Administrative Regulations (EDGAR), 34 CFR Parts 74, 75, 77, 80, 81,
82, 85, and 86; Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects and
Centers--34 CFR Part 350, and the Notice of Final Priority published
elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register.
Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers in Subpart D; and
Disability and Rehabilitation Research Special Projects and
Demonstrations for Model Spinal Cord Injury--34 CFR Part 359 and the
Notice of Final Priorities published elsewhere in this issue of the
Federal Register.
Pre-Application Meetings: Interested parties are invited to
participate in a pre-application meeting to discuss the funding
priority for a RERC on Low Vision and Blindness and a Technologies for
Children with Orthopedic Disabilities and to receive technical
assistance through individual consultation and information about the
funding priorities. The pre-application meeting will be held on April
4, 2000.
A pre-application meeting for the Model Spinal Cord Injury Centers
will be held on April 5, 2000 at the Department of Education, Office of
Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Switzer Building, Room
3065, 330 C St. SW, Washington, DC between 10:00 a.m. and 12:00 a.m.
NIDRR staff will also be available at this location from 1:30 p.m. to
5:00 p.m. on that same day to provide technical assistance through
individual consultation and information about the funding priorities.
NIDRR will make alternate arrangements to accommodate interested
parties who are unable to attend the pre-application meeting in person.
For further information contact William Peterson, Switzer Building,
room 3425, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20202. Telephone
(202) 205-9192, or Joel Myklebust, Switzer Building, room 3042, 400
Maryland Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20202. Telephone (202) 401-2071. If
you use a Telecommunication Device for the Deaf (TDD), you may call
(202) 205-4475.
Assistance to Individuals With Disabilities at the Public Meetings
The meeting site is accessible to individuals with disabilities,
and a sign
[[Page 14356]]
language interpreter will be available. If you need an auxiliary aid or
service other than a sign language interpreter in order to participate
in the meeting (e.g. other interpreting service such as oral, cued
speech, or tactile interpreter; assistive listening device; or
materials in alternate format), notify the contact person listed in
this Notice at least two weeks before the scheduled meeting date.
Although we will attempt to meet a request we receive after this date,
we may not be able to make available the requested auxiliary aid or
service because of insufficient time to arrange it.
Application Notice for Fiscal Year 2000, Model Spinal Cord Injury Centers--CFDA No.84-133N
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Project
Funding priority Deadline for transmittal of number of Award amount (per Period
applications awards year) * (months)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Model Spinal Cord Injury 60 Days, May 12, 2000............. 15 $300,000-$375,000 60
Centers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Note: The Secretary will reject without consideration or evaluation any application that proposes a project
funding level that exceeds the stated maximum award amount per year (See 34 CFR 75.104(b)).
Program Title: Model Spinal Cord Injury Centers.
CFDA Number: 84.133N.
Purpose of Program: Model SCI Centers provide assistance to
establish innovative projects for the delivery, demonstration, and
evaluation of comprehensive medical, vocational, and other
rehabilitation services to meet the wide range of needs of individuals
with SCI.
Eligible Applicants: Parties eligible to apply for grants under
this program are States, public or private agencies, including for-
profit agencies, public or private organizations, including for-profit
organizations, institutions of higher education, and Indian tribes and
tribal organizations.
Projects will be funded at varying amounts up to the maximum
allowed based on individual factors in proposals. Proposed budgets
should reflect costs associated with data collection, proposed
research, and administration. Funding will be determined individually
for each successful applicant up to the maximum allowed based upon 6
documented workload, the peer review process, and overall budgetary
limits of the program.
Final Selection Criterion
The Assistant Secretary will use these selection criteria to
evaluate applications under this program. The maximum score for all the
criteria is 100 points; however, the Assistant Secretary also will use
the following criterion so that up to an additional ten points may be
earned by an applicant for a total possible score of 110 points:
The new emphasis on research and NIDRR's Plan, plus the importance
of the NSCID, require some modifications to the selection criteria for
this program. The Secretary will redistribute points to reflect the
increased emphasis on research, and to add references to the Plan and
NSCID.
(a) Research Project design (30 points). The Secretary reviews each
application to determine to what degree--
(1) There is a clear description of how the objectives of the
project relate to the purpose of the program and the Plan;
(2) The research is likely to produce new and useful information;
(3) The need and target population are adequately defined and are
sufficient for meaningful research and demonstration;
(4) The outcomes are likely to benefit the defined target
population;
(5) The research hypotheses are sound; and
(6) The research methodology is sound in the sample design and
selection, the data collection plan, the measurement instruments, and
the data analysis plan.
(b) Service comprehensiveness (20 points). The Secretary reviews
each application to determine to what degree--
(1) The services to be provided within the project are
comprehensive in scope, and include emergency medical services,
intensive and acute medical care, rehabilitation management,
psychosocial and community reintegration, and follow up;
(2) A broad range of vocational and other rehabilitation services
will be available to individuals with severe disabilities within the
project; and
(3) Services will be coordinated with those services provided by
other appropriate community resources.
(c) Plan of operation (10 points). The Secretary reviews each
application to determine to what degree--
(1) There is an effective plan of operation that ensures proper and
efficient administration of the project;
(2) The applicant's planned use of its resources and personnel is
likely to achieve each objective;
(3) Collaboration between institutions, if proposed, is likely to
be effective;
(4) Participation in the National Spinal Cord Injury Database is
clearly and adequately described; and
(5) There is a clear description of how the applicant will include
eligible project participants who have been traditionally
underrepresented, such as--
(i) Members of racial or ethnic minority groups;
(ii) Women;
(iii) Individuals with disabilities; and
(iv) The elderly.
(d) Quality of key personnel (10 points). The Secretary reviews
each application to determine to what degree--
(1) The principal investigator and other key staff have adequate
training or experience, or both, in spinal cord injury care and
rehabilitation and demonstrate appropriate potential to conduct the
proposed research, demonstration, training, development, or
dissemination activity;
(2) The principal investigator and other key staff are familiar
with pertinent literature or methods, or both;
(3) All the disciplines necessary to establish the
multidisciplinary system described in Sec. 359.11(a) are effectively
represented;
(4) Commitments of staff time are adequate for the project; and
(5) The applicant is likely, as part of its non-discriminatory
employment practices, to encourage applications for employment from
persons who are members of groups that traditionally have been
underrepresented, such as--
(i) Members of racial or ethnic minority groups;
(ii) Women;
(iii) Individuals with disabilities; and
(iv) The elderly.
(e) Adequacy of resources (5 points). The Secretary reviews each
application to determine to what degree--
(1) The facilities planned for use are adequate;
(2) The equipment and supplies planned for use are adequate; and
(3) The commitment of the applicant to provide administrative and
other necessary support is evident.
[[Page 14357]]
(f) Budget/cost effectiveness (5 points). The Secretary reviews
each application to determine to what degree--
(1) The budget for the project is adequate to support the
activities;
(2) The costs are reasonable in relation to the objectives of the
project; and
(3) The budget for subcontracts (if required) is detailed and
appropriate.
(g) Dissemination/utilization (10 points). The Secretary reviews
each application to determine to what degree--
(1) There is a clearly defined plan for dissemination and
utilization of project findings;
(2) The research results are likely to become available to others
working in the field;
(3) The means to disseminate and promote utilization by others are
defined; and
(4) The utilization approach is likely to address the defined need.
(h) Evaluation plan (10 points). The Secretary reviews each
application to determine to what degree--
(1) There is a mechanism to evaluate plans, progress, and results;
(2) The evaluation methods and objectives are likely to produce
data that are quantifiable; and
(3) The evaluation results, where relevant, are likely to be
assessed in a service setting.
Final Additional Selection Criterion
Within the absolute priority (see the notice of final priority
published elsewhere in this issue of the Federal Register), we will
give the following competitive preference to applications that are
otherwise eligible for funding under this priority:
Up to ten (10) points based on the extent to which an application
includes effective strategies for employing and advancing in employment
qualified individuals with disabilities in projects awarded under this
absolute priority. In determining the effectiveness of those
strategies, we will consider the applicant's success, as described in
the application, in employing and advancing in employment qualified
individuals with disabilities in the project.
For purposes of this competitive preference, applicants can be
awarded up to a total of 10 points in addition to those awarded under
the published selection criteria for this priority. That is, an
applicant meeting this competitive preference could earn a maximum
total of 110 points.
Application Notice for Fiscal Year 2000, Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers--CFDA No. 84-133E
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated Project
Funding priority Deadline for transmittal of number of Maximum award period
applications awards amount (per year) * (months)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
84.133E-1, Low Vision and May 12, 2000....................... 1 $650,000 60
Blindness.
84.133E-3, Technologies for May 12, 2000....................... 1 650,000 60
Children with Orthopedic
Disabilities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Note: The Secretary will reject without consideration or evaluation any application that proposes a project
funding level that exceeds the stated maximum award amount per year (See 34 CFR 75.104(b)).
Program Title: Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers (RERCs).
CFDA Number: 84.133E.
Purpose of Program: RERCs conduct research, demonstration, and
training activities regarding rehabilitation technology--including
rehabilitation engineering, assistive technology devices, and assistive
technology services, in order to enhance the opportunities to better
meet the needs of, and address the barriers confronted by, individuals
with disabilities in all aspects of their lives.
Eligible Applicants: Parties eligible to apply for grants under
this program are States, public or private agencies, including for-
profit agencies, public or private organizations, including for-profit
organizations, institutions of higher education, and Indian tribes and
tribal organizations.
Selection Criteria: The Assistant Secretary uses the following
selection criteria to evaluate applications for RERCs on Engineering
for Low Vision and Blindness and Technologies for Children with
Orthopedic Disabilities. (See section 350.54). The maximum score for
all the criteria is 100 points.
(a) Importance of the problem (8 points total). (1) The Secretary
considers the importance of the problem.
(2) In determining the importance of the problem, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the applicant clearly describes the need
and target population (3 points).
(ii) The extent to which the proposed activities address a
significant need of rehabilitation service providers (2 points).
(iii) The extent to which the proposed project will have beneficial
impact on the target population (3 points).
(b) Responsiveness to an absolute or competitive priority (4 points
total). (1) The Secretary considers the responsiveness of the
application to an absolute or competitive priority published in the
Federal Register.
(2) In determining the application's responsiveness to the absolute
or competitive priority, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the applicant addresses all requirements of
the absolute or competitive priority (2 points).
(ii) The extent to which the applicant's proposed activities are
likely to achieve the purposes of the absolute or competitive priority
(2 points).
(c) Design of research activities (20 points total). (1) The
Secretary considers the extent to which the design of research
activities is likely to be effective in accomplishing the objectives of
the project.
(2) In determining the extent to which the design is likely to be
effective in accomplishing the objectives of the project, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the research activities constitute a
coherent, sustained approach to research in the field, including a
substantial addition to the state-of-the-art (4 points).
(ii) The extent to which the methodology of each proposed research
activity is meritorious, including consideration of the extent to
which--
(A) The proposed design includes a comprehensive and informed
review of the current literature, demonstrating knowledge of the state-
of-the-art (3 points);
(B) Each research hypothesis is theoretically sound and based on
current knowledge (3 points);
(C) Each sample population is appropriate and of sufficient size (3
points);
(D) The data collection and measurement techniques are appropriate
and likely to be effective (3 points); and
(E) The data analysis methods are appropriate (4 points).
[[Page 14358]]
(d) Design of development activities (20 points total). (1) The
Secretary considers the extent to which the design of development
activities is likely to be effective in accomplishing the objectives of
the project.
(2) (i) In determining the extent to which the design is likely to
be effective in accomplishing the objectives of the project, the
Secretary considers the following factors--
(ii) The extent to which the plan for development, clinical
testing, and evaluation of new devices and technology is likely to
yield significant products or techniques, including consideration of
the extent to which--
(A) The proposed project will use the most effective and
appropriate technology available in developing the new device or
technique (3 points);
(B) The proposed development is based on a sound conceptual model
that demonstrates an awareness of the state-of-the-art in technology (4
points);
(C) The new device or technique will be developed and tested in an
appropriate environment (3 points);
(D) The new device or technique is likely to be cost-effective and
useful (3 points);
(E) The new device or technique has the potential for commercial or
private manufacture, marketing, and distribution of the product (4
points); and
(F) The proposed development efforts include adequate quality
controls and, as appropriate, repeated testing of products (3 points).
(e) Design of training activities (4 points total). (1) The
Secretary considers the extent to which the design of training
activities is likely to be effective in accomplishing the objectives of
the project.
(2) In determining the extent to which the design is likely to be
effective in accomplishing the objectives of the project, the Secretary
considers the extent to which the type, extent, and quality of the
proposed clinical and laboratory research experience, including the
opportunity to participate in advanced-level research, are likely to
develop highly qualified researchers (4 points).
(f) Design of dissemination activities (4 points total). (1) The
Secretary considers the extent to which the design of dissemination
activities is likely to be effective in accomplishing the objectives of
the project.
(2) In determining the extent to which the design is likely to be
effective in accomplishing the objectives of the project, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the materials to be disseminated are likely
to be effective and usable, including consideration of their quality,
clarity, variety, and format (2 points).
(ii) The extent to which the information to be disseminated will be
accessible to individuals with disabilities (2 point).
(g) Design of utilization activities (4 points total). (1) The
Secretary considers the extent to which the design of utilization
activities is likely to be effective in accomplishing the objectives of
the project.
(2) In determining the extent to which the design is likely to be
effective in accomplishing the objectives of the project, the Secretary
considers the extent to which the potential new users of the
information or technology have a practical use for the information and
are likely to adopt the practices or use the information or technology,
including new devices (4 points).
(h) Design of technical assistance activities (2 points total). (1)
The Secretary considers the extent to which the design of technical
assistance activities is likely to be effective in accomplishing the
objectives of the project.
(2) In determining the extent to which the design is likely to be
effective in accomplishing the objectives of the project, the Secretary
considers the extent to which the methods for providing technical
assistance are of sufficient quality, intensity, and duration (2
points).
(i) Plan of operation (4 points total). (1) The Secretary considers
the quality of the plan of operation.
(2) In determining the quality of the plan of operation, the
Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The adequacy of the plan of operation to achieve the objectives
of the proposed project on time and within budget, including clearly
defined responsibilities, and timelines for accomplishing project tasks
(2 points).
(ii) The adequacy of the plan of operation to provide for using
resources, equipment, and personnel to achieve each objective (2
points).
(j) Collaboration (4 points total). (1) The Secretary considers the
quality of collaboration.
(2) In determining the quality of collaboration, the Secretary
considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which agencies, organizations, or institutions
demonstrate a commitment to collaborate with the applicant (2 points).
(ii) The extent to which agencies, organizations, or institutions
that commit to collaborate with the applicant have the capacity to
carry out collaborative activities (2 points).
(k) Adequacy and reasonableness of the budget (4 points total). (1)
The Secretary considers the adequacy and the reasonableness of the
proposed budget.
(2) In determining the adequacy and the reasonableness of the
proposed budget, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the costs are reasonable in relation to the
proposed project activities (2 point).
(ii) The extent to which the budget for the project, including any
subcontracts, is adequately justified to support the proposed project
activities (2 points).
(1) Plan of evaluation (9 points total). (1) The Secretary
considers the quality of the plan of evaluation.
(2) In determining the quality of the plan of evaluation, the
Secretary considers the extent to which the plan of evaluation provides
for periodic assessment of a project's progress that is based on
identified performance measures that--
(i) Are clearly related to the intended outcomes of the project and
expected impacts on the target population (5 points); and
(ii) Are objective, and quantifiable or qualitative, as appropriate
(4 points).
(m) Project staff (9 points total). (1) The Secretary considers the
quality of the project staff.
(2) In determining the quality of the project staff, the Secretary
considers the extent to which the applicant encourages applications for
employment from persons who are members of groups that have
traditionally been underrepresented based on race, color, national
origin, gender, age, or disability (1 point).
(3) In addition, the Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the key personnel and other key staff have
appropriate training and experience in disciplines required to conduct
all proposed activities (2 points).
(ii) The extent to which the commitment of staff time is adequate
to accomplish all the proposed activities of the project (2 points).
(iii) The extent to which the key personnel are knowledgeable about
the methodology and literature of pertinent subject areas (2 points).
(iv) The extent to which the project staff includes outstanding
scientists in the field (2 points).
(n) Adequacy and accessibility of resources (4 points total). (1)
The Secretary considers the adequacy and accessibility of the
applicant's resources to implement the proposed project.
[[Page 14359]]
(2) In determining the adequacy and accessibility of resources, the
Secretary considers the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the applicant is committed to provide
adequate facilities, equipment, other resources, including
administrative support, and laboratories, if appropriate (2 points).
(ii) The extent to which the applicant has appropriate access to
clinical populations and organizations representing individuals with
disabilities to support advanced clinical rehabilitation research (1
point).
(iii) The extent to which the facilities, equipment, and other
resources are appropriately accessible to individuals with disabilities
who may use the facilities, equipment, and other resources of the
project (1 point).
Final Additional Selection Criteria
Within this absolute priority, we will give the following
competitive preference to applications that are otherwise eligible for
funding under the notice of final priorities published elsewhere in
this issue of the Federal Register:
Up to ten (10) points based on the extent to which an application
includes effective strategies for employing and advancing in employment
qualified individuals with disabilities in projects awarded under these
absolute priorities. In determining the effectiveness of those
strategies, we will consider the applicant's success, as described in
the application, in employing and advancing in employment qualified
individuals with disabilities in the project.
For purposes of this competitive preference, applicants can be
awarded up to a total of 10 points in addition to those awarded under
the published selection criteria for these priorities. That is, an
applicant meeting this competitive preference could earn a maximum
total of 110 points.
Instructions for Application Narrative
The Assistant Secretary strongly recommends the following:
(a) A one-page abstract;
(b) An Application Narrative (i.e., Part III that addresses the
selection criteria that will be used by reviewers in evaluating
individual proposals) of no more than 125 pages double-spaced (no more
than 3 lines per vertical inch) 8\1/2\"x 11"pages (on one side only)
with one inch margins (top, bottom, and sides). The application
narrative page limit recommendation does not apply to: Part I--the
electronically scannable form; Part II--the budget section (including
the narrative budget justification); and Part IV--the assurances and
certifications; and
(c) A font no smaller than a 12-point font and an average character
density no greater than 14 characters per inch.
Instructions for Transmittal of Applications
(a) If an applicant wants to apply for a grant, the applicant
must--
(1) Mail the original and two copies of the application on or
before the deadline date to: U.S. Department of Education, Application
Control Center, Attention: (CFDA # [Applicant must insert number and
letter]), Washington, DC 20202-4725, or
(2) Hand deliver or express mail the original and two copies of the
application by 4:30 p.m. [Washington, DC time] on or before the
deadline date to: U.S. Department of Education, Application Control
Center, Attention: (CFDA # [Applicant must insert number and letter]),
Room #3633, Regional Office Building #3, 7th and D Streets, SW.,
Washington, DC 20202.
(b) An applicant must show one of the following as proof of
mailing:
(1) A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark.
(2) A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the
U.S. Postal Service.
(3) A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial
carrier.
(4) Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Assistant
Secretary.
(c) If an application is mailed through the U.S. Postal Service,
the Secretary does not accept either of the following as proof of
mailing:
(1) A private metered postmark.
(2) A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service.
Notes
(1) The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a dated
postmark. Before relying on this method, an applicant should check
with its local post office.
(2) An applicant wishing to know that its application has been
received by the Department must include with the application a
stamped self-addressed postcard containing the CFDA number and title
of this program.
(3) The applicant must indicate on the envelope and--if not
provided by the Department--in Item 10 of the Application for
Federal Assistance (Standard Form 424) the CFDA number--and letter,
if any--of the competition under which the application is being
submitted.
Application Forms and Instructions
The appendix to this application is divided into four parts. These
parts are organized in the same manner that the submitted application
should be organized. These parts are as follows:
PART I: Application for Federal Assistance (Standard Form 424 (Rev.
1/12/1999) and instructions.
PART II: Budget Form--Non-Construction Programs (Standard Form
524A) and instructions.
PART III: Application Narrative.
Additional Materials
Estimated Public Reporting Burden.
Assurances--Non-Construction Programs (Standard Form 424B).
Certification Regarding Lobbying, Debarment, Suspension, and Other
Responsibility Matters: and Drug-Free Work-Place Requirements (ED Form
80-0013).
Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and
Voluntary Exclusion: Lower Tier Covered Transactions (ED Form 80-0014)
and instructions. (NOTE: ED Form GCS-014 is intended for the use of
primary participants and should not be transmitted to the Department.)
Certification of Eligibility for Federal Assistance in Certain
Programs (ED Form 80-0016).
Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (Standard Form LLL (if
applicable) and instructions; and Disclosure Lobbying Activities
Continuation Sheet (Standard Form LLL-A).
An applicant may submit information on a photostatic copy of the
application and budget forms, the assurances, and the certifications.
However, the application form, the assurances, and the certifications
must each have an original signature. No grant may be awarded unless a
completed application form has been received.
For Applications Contact: The Grants and Contracts Service Team
(GCST), Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue S.W., room 3317,
Switzer Building, Washington, D.C., (202) 205-8207. Individuals who use
a Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (TDD) may call the TDD number
at (202) 205-9860. The preferred method for requesting information is
to FAX your request to (202) 205-8717.
Individuals with disabilities may obtain a copy of the application
package in an alternate format by contacting the GCST. However, the
Department is not able to reproduce in an alternate format the standard
forms included in the application package.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donna Nangle, U.S. Department of
Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, S.W., room 3414, Switzer Building,
Washington, D.C. 20202-2645. Telephone: (202) 205-5880 or TDD (202)
205-4475. Internet: Donna__Nangle@ed.gov
[[Page 14360]]
Electronic Access to This Document
You may view this document, as well as all other Department of
Education documents published in the Federal Register, in text or Adobe
Portable Document Format (PDF) on the Internet at either of the
following sites:
http://ocfo.ed.gov/fedreg.htm
http://www.ed.gov/news.html
To use the PDF you must have the Adobe Acrobat Reader Program with
Search, which is available free at either of the preceding sites. If
you have questions about using the PDF, call the U.S. Government
Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1-888-293-6498; or in the
Washington, DC, area at (202) 512-1530.
Note: The official version of document is the Document published
in the Federal Register. Free Internet access to the official
edition of the Federal Register and the Code of Federal Regulations
is available on GPO Access at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/
index.html
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers: 84.133N, Special
Projects and Demonstrations for Spinal Cord Injuries and 84.133E,
Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers)
Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 760-762.
Dated: March 8, 2000.
Judith E. Heumann,
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services.
Appendix--Application Forms and Instructions
Applicants are advised to reproduce and complete the application
forms in this Section. Applicants are required to submit an original
and two copies of each application as provided in this Section.
However, applicants are encouraged to submit an original and seven
copies of each application in order to facilitate the peer review
process and minimize copying errors.
Frequent Questions
1. Can I Get an Extension of the Due Date?
No. On rare occasions the Department of Education may extend a
closing date for all applicants. If that occurs, a notice of the
revised due date is published in the Federal Register. However,
there are no extensions or exceptions to the due date made for
individual applicants.
2. What Should Be Included in the Application?
The application should include a project narrative, vitae of key
personnel, and a budget, as well as the Assurances forms included in
this package. Vitae of staff or consultants should include the
individual's title and role in the proposed project, and other
information that is specifically pertinent to this proposed project.
The budgets for both the first year and all subsequent project years
should be included.
If collaboration with another organization is involved in the
proposed activity, the application should include assurances of
participation by the other parties, including written agreements or
assurances of cooperation. It is not useful to include general
letters of support or endorsement in the application.
If the applicant proposes to use unique tests or other
measurement instruments that are not widely known in the field, it
would be helpful to include the instrument in the application.
Many applications contain voluminous appendices that are not
helpful and in many cases cannot even be mailed to the reviewers. It
is generally not helpful to include such things as brochures,
general capability statements of collaborating organizations, maps,
copies of publications, or descriptions of other projects completed
by the applicant.
3. What Format Should Be Used for the Application?
NIDRR generally advises applicants that they may organize the
application to follow the selection criteria that will be used. The
specific review criteria vary according to the specific program, and
are contained in this Consolidated Application Package.
4. May I Submit Applications to More Than One NIDRR Program Competition
or More Than One Application to a Program?
Yes. You may submit applications to any program for which they
are responsive to the program requirements. You may submit the same
application to as many competitions as you believe appropriate. You
may also submit more than one application in any given competition.
5. What Is the Allowable Indirect Cost Rate?
The limits on indirect costs vary according to the program and
the type of application. An applicant for a Rehabilitation Research
Project should limit indirect charges to the organizations approved
indirect cost rate. If the organization does not have an approved
indirect cost rate, the application should include an estimated
actual rate.
6. Can Profitmaking Businesses Apply for Grants?
Yes. However, for-profit organizations will not be able to
collect a fee or profit on the grant, and in some programs will be
required to share in the costs of the project.
7. Can Individuals Apply for Grants?
No. Only organizations are eligible to apply for grants under
NIDRR programs. However, individuals are the only entities eligible
to apply for fellowships.
8. Can NIDRR Staff Advise Me Whether My Project Is of Interest to NIDRR
or Likely To Be Funded?
No. NIDRR staff can advise you of the requirements of the
program in which you propose to submit your application. However,
staff cannot advise you of whether your subject area or proposed
approach is likely to receive approval.
9. How Do I Assure That My Application Will Be Referred to the Most
Appropriate Panel for Review?
Applicants should be sure that their applications are referred
to the correct competition by clearly including the competition
title and CFDA number, including alphabetical code, on the Standard
Form 424, and including a project title that describes the project.
10. How Soon After Submitting My Application Can I Find Out if It Will
Be Funded?
The time from closing date to grant award date varies from
program to program. Generally speaking, NIDRR endeavors to have
awards made within five to six months of the closing date.
Unsuccessful applicants generally will be notified within that time
frame as well. For the purpose of estimating a project start date,
the applicant should estimate approximately six months from the
closing date, but no later than the following September 30.
11. Can I Call NIDRR To Find Out if My Application Is Being Funded?
No. When NIDRR is able to release information on the status of
grant applications, it will notify applicants by letter. The results
of the peer review cannot be released except through this formal
notification.
12. If My Application is Successful, Can I Assume I Will Get the
Requested Budget Amount in Subsequent Years?
No. Funding in subsequent years is subject to availability of
funds and project performance.
13. Will All Approved Applications Be Funded?
No. It often happens that the peer review panels approve for
funding more applications than NIDRR can fund within available
resources. Applicants who are approved but not funded are encouraged
to consider submitting similar applications in future competitions.
BILLING CODE 4000-01-U
[[Page 14361]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.000
[[Page 14362]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.001
[[Page 14363]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.002
[[Page 14364]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.003
[[Page 14365]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.004
[[Page 14366]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.005
[[Page 14367]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.006
[[Page 14368]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.007
[[Page 14369]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.008
[[Page 14370]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.009
[[Page 14371]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.010
[[Page 14372]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.011
[[Page 14373]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.012
[[Page 14374]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.013
[[Page 14375]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.014
[[Page 14376]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.015
[[Page 14377]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN16MR00.016
[FR Doc. 00-6141 Filed 3-15-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-C